Is Anybody There?

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit,' says Yahweh Sabaoth" Zach 4:6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dio di Signore, nella Sua volontà è nostra pace!" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Ben Franklin 1759

Thursday, November 08, 2012

1st 2012-2013 Supreme Court Ruling Defends Pro-Life Activist’s Free Speech Rights

It is only a small victory. But it is a positive one. & given the current attack on free speech for Pro-lifers by the Obama administration, we can hope it is a sign of things to come that the Supreme Court will actually do the right thing when these attacks continue.

In 2005 pro-life activist Steven Lefemine (above), sued the police department of Greenwood County, South Carolina. The police had stopped him & his band of 20 pro-life activists with Columbia Christians for Life from displaying graphic images of abortion at a busy intersection. Police maintained the group was creating a disturbance after receiving several complaints.

After thepolice threatened him again at another protest, Lefamine decided to sue them in 2008 on the basis that his First Amendment right to free speech was being violated. Lefamine won his case in federal district court. But, the judge denied Lefemine’s request for reimbursement of attorney fees. This despite the  Civil Rights Attorneys Fees Act of 1976.
As the  Los Angeles Times pointed out, that in the Act "Congress said civil rights lawyers who sued and won cases involving constitutional rights were entitled to claim “reasonable attorney’s fees.” The law was intended to bolster civil rights advocates who filed suits in that era over issues such as school desegregation."
You may remember that the ACLU & Americans United for Separation of Church and State have often exploited this law. The use it to intimidate local governments, schools, etc., who fear monetary reprisal if a case against them is successful. They give in to the ACLU blackmail rather than defend themselves, thus often surrendering their rights instead of defending them.*
Monday, the Supreme Court had something to say about this denial for reimbersement. According to the Chicago Tribune:
"In its first decision since the 2012-2013 term officially began last month, the court reversed a ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals against Steven Lefemine and Columbia Christians for Life, which had sought to recover the fees…..
A federal district court permanently barred the police from imposing content-based restrictions on Lefemine’s signs but refused to award attorneys’ fees.
The 4th Circuit later upheld the fee denial, saying the permanent injunction did not make Lefemine a “prevailing party.”
But in its unsigned decision, the Supreme Court said he was because the injunction had changed police behavior in a way that directly benefited him.
“Before the ruling, the police intended to stop Lefemine from protesting with his signs; after the ruling, the police could not,” the court wrote. “That ruling worked the requisite material alteration in the parties’ relationship.”
The Supreme Court returned the case to a lower court to decide if any “special circumstances” might make the award unjust.
Steven Fitschen, a lawyer for Lefemine, said attorneys’ fees in the case may reach hundreds of thousands of dollars, and that other protesters should welcome the decision.
“Protesters of all stripes, whose civil rights were violated by law enforcement, would have been at risk of losing fee awards,” Fitschen said in a phone interview."
It isn't completely over. & depending on the lower court ruling on "special circumstances" it may end up again in the Supreme Court. For now, the Supreme Court has protected free speech. But this is another reminder of how precarious things are in the USA & why we must continue to pray as well as be dilligent to do all we can to defend those rights.
You may also remember that Planned Parenthood tried to use a similar attack against Eric Scheidler of the Pro-Life Action League. In his case he won in the Supreme Court.

Source: Supreme Court Upholds Pro-Life Activist’s Free Speech Rights


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home Headlines

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

Get this widget!
Visit the Widget Gallery